What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5402271?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Kristall Savage Bessant at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East,

How much money was awarded in case 5402271?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,350.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5402271?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5402271?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13084006-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5402271?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Kristall Savage Bessant at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East,

How much money was awarded in case 5402271?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,350.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5402271?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5402271?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13084006-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

141A Portage Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5402271 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5402271 — net $7,578.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 4 February 2026	$10,350.00	Rent arrears (to 4 February 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,578.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,578.00

Order

The tenancy of Kristall Savage Bessant at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024 is terminated, and possession is granted to Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh, at midnight on Friday 13 February 2026.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 (BN-00052760) to Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh immediately.
Kristall Savage Bessant must pay Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh $7,578.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

On 1 December 2025, the landlord filed an application seeking termination of the tenancy for rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Mr Narayanaraja and Mr Alwyn, Property Managers, appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Who are the parties to the tenancy agreement?

The landlord provided the Tribunal with a copy of the tenancy agreement which they says is the most recent and valid contract.
The Tenancy agreement names Kristall Bessant as the tenant of the property. The tenancy commencement date was 1 February 2025, with the fixed term ending on 31 January 2026. The contract was signed and dated by the landlord on 31 January 2025.
The tenant disputes the validity of this contact and states that she lives at the property with her Cousin Tipone Pahiri who is the other tenant and responsible for half of the rent. The tenant provided the Tribunal with the following documents in support of her claims: a. A copy of the joint tenancy application form in the names of the tenant and Tipone Pahiri, signed and dated by them on 19 January 2025. b. A letter from PR Property Manager dated 19 January 2025 stating that the Kristal Bessant and Tipene Pahiri have applied to rent one of their properties. The letter sets out the amount of rent due, the move in date (recorded as being 24 January 2025), and the move in costs. c. An unsigned tenancy agreement in both the name of the tenant and Tipene Pahiri. This contract specifies the tenancy commencement date as 29 January 2025 with the fixed term ending on 28 January 2026. It appears that this contract was prepared on 22 January 2025.
The landlord accepts that the tenant and Mr Pahiri initially applied to be joint tenants of the property and acknowledged that documents were prepared on that basis. However, he said that Ms Bessant then told him that the tenancy agreement needed to be in her name only for benefit purposes. The landlord said that following that request he completed and signed the new tenancy agreement, a copy of which was provided to the tenant, which he unsuccessfully requested she sign on multiple occasions. This new tenancy agreement states the tenancy commenced on 1 February 2025 with the fixed term expiring on 31 January 2026.
The Tribunal was told that the tenant moved into the property on 2 February 2025 and that her rent had been paid by Work and Income New Zealand.
Having heard from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the landlord completed a new tenancy agreement in the name of Ms Bessant only, at her request. The Tribunal find that this tenancy agreement, naming Ms Bessant only, supersedes the earlier tenancy agreement naming the tenant and Mr Pahiri, and that Ms Bessant is solely liable under the terms of the contact and the provisions of the Act. Should the tenancy be terminated
Section 55(1)(a) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that the rent was, at the date on which the application was filed under section 86, at least 21 days in arrears.
The landlord provided up to date rent records which prove the amount owed. At the date of filing the tenant’s rent arrears totalled $4,100.00. The rent was at least 21 days in arrears and the tenancy is terminated.
The tenant said the rent arrears accrued after she was subjected to a 13-week benefit stand down period. The tenant did not accept the landlord’s rent summary but was unable to provide the Tribunal with her own rent records or a rent arrears total.
At the date of hearing the tenant’s rent arrears totalled $10,350.00. Having considered all of the evidence the Tribunal makes an order for the amount claimed.
The Tribunal grants the landlord possession of the property at midnight on Friday 13 February 2026. This will give the tenant time to vacate the property and return it to the landlord in a reasonably clean and tidy condition without significantly increasing the rent debt.
The tenant remains liable to pay rent as and when it falls due until the end of the tenancy. Other matters
Because Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
Despite being wholly successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5402271 — net $7,578.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 4 February 2026	$10,350.00	Rent arrears (to 4 February 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,578.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,578.00

Order

The tenancy of Kristall Savage Bessant at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024 is terminated, and possession is granted to Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh, at midnight on Friday 13 February 2026.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 (BN-00052760) to Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh immediately.
Kristall Savage Bessant must pay Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh $7,578.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

On 1 December 2025, the landlord filed an application seeking termination of the tenancy for rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Mr Narayanaraja and Mr Alwyn, Property Managers, appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Who are the parties to the tenancy agreement?

The landlord provided the Tribunal with a copy of the tenancy agreement which they says is the most recent and valid contract.
The Tenancy agreement names Kristall Bessant as the tenant of the property. The tenancy commencement date was 1 February 2025, with the fixed term ending on 31 January 2026. The contract was signed and dated by the landlord on 31 January 2025.
The tenant disputes the validity of this contact and states that she lives at the property with her Cousin Tipone Pahiri who is the other tenant and responsible for half of the rent. The tenant provided the Tribunal with the following documents in support of her claims: a. A copy of the joint tenancy application form in the names of the tenant and Tipone Pahiri, signed and dated by them on 19 January 2025. b. A letter from PR Property Manager dated 19 January 2025 stating that the Kristal Bessant and Tipene Pahiri have applied to rent one of their properties. The letter sets out the amount of rent due, the move in date (recorded as being 24 January 2025), and the move in costs. c. An unsigned tenancy agreement in both the name of the tenant and Tipene Pahiri. This contract specifies the tenancy commencement date as 29 January 2025 with the fixed term ending on 28 January 2026. It appears that this contract was prepared on 22 January 2025.
The landlord accepts that the tenant and Mr Pahiri initially applied to be joint tenants of the property and acknowledged that documents were prepared on that basis. However, he said that Ms Bessant then told him that the tenancy agreement needed to be in her name only for benefit purposes. The landlord said that following that request he completed and signed the new tenancy agreement, a copy of which was provided to the tenant, which he unsuccessfully requested she sign on multiple occasions. This new tenancy agreement states the tenancy commenced on 1 February 2025 with the fixed term expiring on 31 January 2026.
The Tribunal was told that the tenant moved into the property on 2 February 2025 and that her rent had been paid by Work and Income New Zealand.
Having heard from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the landlord completed a new tenancy agreement in the name of Ms Bessant only, at her request. The Tribunal find that this tenancy agreement, naming Ms Bessant only, supersedes the earlier tenancy agreement naming the tenant and Mr Pahiri, and that Ms Bessant is solely liable under the terms of the contact and the provisions of the Act. Should the tenancy be terminated
Section 55(1)(a) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that the rent was, at the date on which the application was filed under section 86, at least 21 days in arrears.
The landlord provided up to date rent records which prove the amount owed. At the date of filing the tenant’s rent arrears totalled $4,100.00. The rent was at least 21 days in arrears and the tenancy is terminated.
The tenant said the rent arrears accrued after she was subjected to a 13-week benefit stand down period. The tenant did not accept the landlord’s rent summary but was unable to provide the Tribunal with her own rent records or a rent arrears total.
At the date of hearing the tenant’s rent arrears totalled $10,350.00. Having considered all of the evidence the Tribunal makes an order for the amount claimed.
The Tribunal grants the landlord possession of the property at midnight on Friday 13 February 2026. This will give the tenant time to vacate the property and return it to the landlord in a reasonably clean and tidy condition without significantly increasing the rent debt.
The tenant remains liable to pay rent as and when it falls due until the end of the tenancy. Other matters
Because Pr Property Management Limited As Agent For Aman Singh has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
Despite being wholly successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5402271 — Rent arrears at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5402271 — Rent arrears at 141A Portage Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Who are the parties to the tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Who are the parties to the tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions